Coercive Powers, what does that mean?

Coercive Powers, what does that mean?

Laws are the legal embodiment of the opinions of the consensus as to what is right and proper behavior, with the coercive powers endowed by the government to the police being the physical embodiment of the "or else."

When you put the phrase, ‘coercive powers,’ in context with the legitimate writing and teaching of the Catholic Church, you start to wonder, if it is written somewhere that whenever Mr. Henry’s persuasion fails on an issue he does not approve of, coercion could be brought to bear?
With no qualifying, ‘or else?’

The paragraph in the ‘Pastoral Letter,’ published on the web site of the Calgary Diocese of the Catholic Church over the name of F. B. Henry, Bishop of Calgary January 21,2005 I find disturbing is, ‘Since homosexuality, adultery, prostitution and pornography undermine the foundations of the family, the basis of society, then the State must use its coercive power to proscribe or curtail them in the interests of the common good.’

What is Mr. Henry’s "or else?"

The same Charter of Rights that protects Mr. Henry's right to speak his mind, practice his religion, also protects people who want to be married, or joined in a same sex union to be treated equal under the law.

This is the same Constitution that is at the basis of Canadian law that has allowed religious organizations to marry who and how they want to.

It is also the same document that is purported to protect all in Canada, from our government’s use of excessive coercive powers. It also tries to separate the state from the church, except the part where it allows the Catholic Church to have its own schools.

You cannot cherry pick the parts you like and pause the ones you don’t, until you get what you want.

Despite what politicians like Art Hanger or Ralph Klein might want to do, so they can play the game of ‘Hot Button, politics.

Does Mr. Henry wants the state to help him enforce his church’s current definition of marriage? Or does Mr. Henry consider this a one-way gate, and the government will do his bidding on his chosen sins, but not want something in return for doing that bidding?

Is it a ‘Henryism,’ that where ever his or his church’s persuasion fail, he wants the government to step in with its coercion to be brought to bear?

The call for the use of government coercive powers has no basis in fact from the teachings of Jesus.

Mr. Henry should be prepared to defend and define the words and terms he uses, and just what they may mean to people inside his church, and the majority of Canadians who are not Catholic.
Especially when they are asking the state to use their coercive powers to right a wrong.

Especially in the special place that Mr. Henry finds himself in.

Are we talking about the government using some sort of ‘coercive power’ to adopt a ‘Mr. Henry Egalitarianism,’ as the moral doctrine which all Canadian laws will be based?

This ‘Mr. Henry Egalitarianism,’ will say that equality is to prevail, as long as the Catholic Church approves of the groups to be treated equal, and by how much are to be equal?

Pure egalitarianism is as close to ‘pure Jesus,’ as a Christian can get.

Now that Ralph Klein is on Mr. Henry’s side thanks to my use of the provincial government’s ‘coercive powers,’ is he meaning the sort of ‘coercive powers’ that Ralph Klein’s government has used to keep the homeless, and poor a growth industry in Calgary, even during Alberta Advantage?

Or does Mr. Henry want the Provincial government to use its, ‘coercive powers,’ similar to those it will try to enact in Bill 24, entitled the Fatalities Enquiries Act, to allow the Minister to decide whether, or what in the report is released to the media?

Does Mr. Henry want the Premier to violate Section 15 of the Charter of Rights, namely the right to being treated equal under the law, along with Albertan’s rights to have a free press?
Maybe there is a third basic human right, and we can make this a trifecta.

How far is Premier Klein prepared to go in his jumping on the ‘Rights Sell Off,’ Bandwagon? What is Mr. Klein’s "or else?" Or is this just, ‘good old Ralph,’ trying to hold on to the reins of power until his legaxy is established?

If the Premier goes ahead with his idea of imposing some sort of coercive action and does ban same-sex marriages as Mr. Henry seems to be asking for, who will pay for the legal costs of the Province when it is overturned in the Supreme Court of Canada, as advised by his Justice Minister?

If Mr. Klein exempts the provinces Justices of the Peace, Licence Registry personnel from performing same sex marriages because it is against their religious beliefs, where does it end? Police don’t have to enforce the laws that do not agree with their religious beliefs? Judges? Crown Prosecutors?

Is that an acceptable ‘or else?’ It is the start of the slippery slope?

The Canadian government of 1896 found itself able to use its, ‘coercive powers,’ to “persuade” Indians to give up their ceremonial practices and surrender ceremonial objects often for a few dollars to offset hunger

Is that an acceptable ‘or else?’

They Canadian government has seemed to be able to use its ‘coercive powers,’ against many different kinds of Canadians throughout our history.

As Rev. Bonnie Arends of Camrose said in a recent letter to the Camrose Booster’s editor, ‘ One of the reasons Jesus was killed was that he offended many of the religious people of his day by welcoming sinners and tax collectors, women, traitors, foreigners, prostitutes, children and slaves. Who knows, maybe there were a few homosexuals in the mix also.’

Mr. Henry has said he wants the government to use its coercive powers to put a fence around the traditional definition of marriage. I think it is the responsibility of the Bishop to put a fence around the definition and limits he would see applied to the term, ‘coercive powers,’ as used in his Pastoral Letter.

Maybe Mr. Henry is looking so hard for a sliver in the eyes of those of us who endorse the plan to allow same sex marriages or union, that he has over looked the wall he is building up around himself and shrinking number of Canadians who really don’t have a problem with same sex unions.